Why do people fake emotions?

vulnerability
fear of judgement

 

I tend to think that people fake their emotions because like above, they fear judgment and also they want to conform.

Sometimes I have sensed that people fake emotions because for whatever reason, they are uncomfortable with who, how and where they are in some situation or circumstance.

 

Defense mechanism

 

To be accepted and to hide their true feelings. Perhaps to be socially appropriate. Some people really struggle with social skills.

 

At times some of us hide our emotions so we do not destroy others. If those we try to hide our emotions from really know us well, they see through it and hide that, too. Sad thing is reality and truth are hidden yet spoken without words or reactions.....unhealthy.

For example, some couples grow apart. Commitments are kept but living life to its fullest cannot happen. While it is commendable and possibly sometimes the right thing to do, the one knows what is going on with the other that has become unhappy. Always heard to let someone go if you love them, but that must be difficult if not impossible for some to do. The one that needs to go ends up staying so the other will not be hurt. In doing so, love is shown but the person becomes a bit broken inside. The other has to see this, yet refuses to acknowledge it. I would say, then, love and concern may possibly be at least one reason emotions are hidden.

Where does truth enter into this picture, or is truth exemplified in it? Tough question with many possibilities. Good subject to ponder.

 

Simple, its extremely useful, in many different ways. However there is a fine line between using it for aid of others, or for personal gain (with disregard of others).

The grasp that one has on faking emotions though has a huge impact though on how well this comes across.

The biggest use it has for me is social navigation. I pay very close attention to how people say things, particulary in large groups. There are often times where a specefic emotion is needed to be expressed, and if it is not it will cause disconfort for the group, or for myself (more often then not both go hand in hand). It is hard for me to force myself to feel a certain way, and I have a "set" of emotions I can easily express. When I have to deviate from that I will conjur up an emotional response that will be needed for the situation.

 

To maintain a sense of privacy and to draw the line of personal boundary.

For some people, expressing their real emotions may mean exposing a very private part of themselves.

 

From your wiki source:

 

hmm ok I think I misunderstood what you were saying in your OP. In the OP you were talking about people "faking" emotions and now you're talking about "situations when some people undermine the emotions of other people." To me "faking" emotions is something different. It's like when someone exagerrates unhappiness to get a reaction, or when someone pretends to be caring when in actual fact they really don't give a shit, or ...all kinds of other things...basically it's not being genuine for either manipulative or attempted manipulative reasons, or fear of hurting someone or insecurity..whatever.

"Undermining" someone else's emotions is different. Instead of one person's behaviour, we're now talking about interpersonal reactions. As for this type of thing, Sometimes when what your talking about happens, I would describe it as an attempt to disvalue what the other person has to say, by labeling it. It's a horribly ineffective way to engage in dialogue or debate and about one step above name-calling. There are exceptions to this however. If someone is truly being emotionally reactive, then in that case it's not devaluing, it's just pointing out behaviour that is getting in the way of some kind of resolution. And this is what we are after in a dialogue...a form of greater understanding by sharing different view points and points of knowledge and experience and ultimately come to a resolution. It's not about rationality over emotions. We're a bunch of imperfect,complicated, fallible, mixed up humans trying to figure things out.

There are some decent examinations available to read on how the different cognitive funcions work and how we 'work' them. When you say that they exist, but they're not what we call them, I think I understand what you're getting at. Maybe this is related to your first point about emotions and reasoning supporting each other? Well, yeah of course they do! We may fool ourselves that we are that compartmentalized, or at least some of us do. But, obviously we are not.

ok..ok..ok...hold on there one sec cowboy! LOL You're mixing things up a bit, but that's ok. What you're experiencing with some behaviours that you term "T misanthropy" is not anything to do with the Te or Ti functions. Misanthropy is an emotional neurotic reaction that has nothing to do with "T" functions. It may be exhibited by people who's dominant functions are thinking. It can also be exhibited by those who's dominant function is "F" or even "N" or whatever. Altruism and misanthropy are not split along these lines.

As for objectivity and acceptance....haha don't be fooled....it's all a mere illusion.

There are no truly objective functions. Every single thing we experience is by it's nature subjective, because we are subjects and not objects

Also out of all of the MBTI funcions - I/E, N/S, T/F, and J/P - sensing and intuition are probably the most subjective/individual/divisive of all.

The way I see it:

Introversion vs. Extroversion defines how we relate and where/how we get our energy and information, either externally or internally.

Thinking vs. Feeling is how we are naturally inclined or predisposed to process information.

Judging vs. Perceiving is how we prefer or are naturally inclined to order our universe; our external reality so as to most effectively use our other functions.

Intuition vs. Sensing is our most basic natural inclination to receive information. I believe we are born with an inherent disposition toward one or the other being dominant and I think this difference is one of the most unique.

They all work together though and to grasp how they do that, you really have to understand the interplay of the cognitive functions.

Lastly, this "T misanthropy", which I think is your main point of contention? It has more to do with someone's Enneagram type than their MBTI type. MBTI is like a character or team we are given at birth that we're disposed to play on...say when you're born you are basically a San Jos